JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
I do know what is an Improvised Explosive Device. I do not understand how the availability of legally-owned firearms has kept various individuals from involving themselves with the aforementioned explosive devices. Maybe I'm reading too much into what was written. Think I'll go have a Fat Tire and think about other things...

Sorry I misread your post then. Basically the way I read @MadDuner's post was bad people will always find a way to do bad things. Like the box truck in Paris or the bomb in the car in New Yorks Time square that was foiled a couple years ago. They outlaw guns and those people will find a way to do other things and they could be even more devastating than what they currently have.
 
Bad people have guns... so [far] they haven't transitioned to IEDs to carry out their evil. If they ever do, the idea of an "active shooter" will look like child's play.
The IEDs about which we know are laid by rigid ideologues in "portable toilet" countries that have yet to leave the Seventh Century behind. I doubt we'll see such instances of IED usage in America because criminals are most usually lazy; they are not going to design and build a bomb, then transport it to a place where it will be used in an effort to affect the thinking of those who survive the detonation of the device. The useless organisms who build and lay IEDs are driven by an ideology. An active shooter is usually driven by rage (the punk who shot-up the high school in Florida), or is some sort of fruitcake (the punk who shot-up the elementary school in Connecticut, or wherever it was). I respect your analysis, but I do not agree with the end result you have derived...
 
The IEDs about which we know are laid by rigid ideologues in "portable toilet" countries that have yet to leave the Seventh Century behind. I doubt we'll see such instances of IED usage in America because criminals are most usually lazy; they are not going to design and build a bomb, then transport it to a place where it will be used in an effort to affect the thinking of those who survive the detonation of the device. The useless organisms who build and lay IEDs are driven by an ideology. An active shooter is usually driven by rage (the punk who shot-up the high school in Florida), or is some sort of fruitcake (the punk who shot-up the elementary school in Connecticut, or wherever it was). I respect your analysis, but I do not agree with the end result you have derived...
The counterpoint is that they can be lazy as we have 330,000,000 guns in America.
 
The IEDs about which we know are laid by rigid ideologues in "portable toilet" countries that have yet to leave the Seventh Century behind. I doubt we'll see such instances of IED usage in America because criminals are most usually lazy; they are not going to design and build a bomb, then transport it to a place where it will be used in an effort to affect the thinking of those who survive the detonation of the device. The useless organisms who build and lay IEDs are driven by an ideology. An active shooter is usually driven by rage (the punk who shot-up the high school in Florida), or is some sort of fruitcake (the punk who shot-up the elementary school in Connecticut, or wherever it was). I respect your analysis, but I do not agree with the end result you have derived...
Well, I certainly hope that nobody is going to make an effort to prove me correct!

I still contend that most of the mass shooting events are a direct result of media coverage and keeping the idea of such an event at the front of every mentally unstable person's mind.
 
I still contend that most of the mass shooting events are a direct result of media coverage and keeping the idea of such an event at the front of every mentally unstable person's mind.
I can agree with you about that. The Criminal Left Media is forever looking for material to fill their 24-hour broadcasts. The old newspaper adage about "If it bleeds, it leads" works just as well on TV as it once did on newsprint. Maybe even better, because watching TV is far more effortless than is reading a news story...
 
Never happen! It will all melt down before that happens! They will never come for the guns in any numbers, they know they cannot, so they use and expand the "Red Flag Laws" and hope they can scare enough people to give them up or else! No penalties would stop people, and no amount of threats would get folks to turn in their guns, so it's all academic!
 
. . . shooters would be hesitant if the penalty for using a gun in a crime and [to be] convicted would be Death Row with only 1 appeal.
AG Barr said something similar to this a week or so ago. He said the penalty for these mass-shootings for surviving perps ought to be the death penalty. Don't remember if he said anything about an appeal, but our laws require it in pretty much any conviction (am I correct on that?).

I think if the penalty was certain death for a mass shooting, the perps would think twice about executing such a crime. But maybe not. The nutcases who commit these crimes have abandoned all thought and reason, to be replaced with blind rage and irrational hatred. 'Bout all we can do with these animals is to try them under our impartial laws and execute the sentence once its been delivered by a jury of the defendant's peers.

I'd like to see public hangings for the crazy batsards who perpetrate these crimes. I want everyone to witness the ghastliness of a hanging. If seeing an execution in this manner stops even one perp from committing his eventual crime, I think our society would be improved. My dad used to beat my bare assets with a belt when I was a kid. I learned the painful lesson to not do twice what merited the whippin' in the first place. A perp sent to Hellsinki for his capital crimes will never commit that crime again. It's sad that we have to resort to this method in the Land of the Free, but men are not angels. Severe measures must be applied to such severe crimes. What else can we do? Providing three hots and a cot for Life to some is a vacation, not a punishment. It's better for society to permanently remove the cancer than to keep it separated from law-abiding citizens for decades and decades...
 
I forgot that those willing to commit suicide like a terrorist, there is really no way to stop them.
You are correct. The only way to halt terrorist attacks is to essentially eliminate all Liberty. I'm no criminologist, but I'll go out on a limb and argue there is no terrorism in North Korea. There ain't much else there, either, save for an excess of tyranny, misery and fear. And widespread hunger amongst the peasantry. Liberty requires the People to be responsible for their social behavior. Pity that men are not angels. If they were, there'd be no need for laws.
 
Close the Border for a start, these people ARE under surveillance, round them up and arrest them or deport them, but get rid of them!
Domestic terrorists are a different problem, but one that CAN be fixed, Almost all these shooters and terrorists WERE known by LEO, and yet they were allowed to commit their acts anyway! Figure out who the elites are who are allowing and even encouraging these shooters to act and hold them accountable, because SOME ONE is pushing this button to get the guns away from all of us! Might be tinfoil, but I see no other explanation for what we see happening!
 
Wow! I gotta tell you, the intensity of this thread has worn me out. Been a long time since I've been in one on any site that has been so busy and with so many intelligent responses. I gotta take a breather...
 
Listening to Mark Levin, right now. He played that soundbite of Bunghole O'Rourke screaming-on about taking our Black Rifles. Levin says such a thing will never happen. He went into maybe thirty seconds of explanation as to why not, but I can't repeat what he said. Suffice to say, Levin says it will not happen. Levin is one hellsinki of a lawyer. He's never wrong about the law...
 
Neither is the ATF (wrong about the law). If they are, then they make it not wrong.
Yes; the ATF is a regulatory agency. The Constitution allows regulatory agencies to promulgate regulations that have the force of law. Correct me if I'm wrong, but did not Heller vs. DC (2008) come to the conclusion that commonplace weapons (like handguns and AR-type rifles) cannot be banned out of existence? I'm no lawyer and I do not keep my ears peeled for what new decisions come down from the Bench, but I believe Justice Thomas wrote that common weapons cannot be outlawed because they are protected by the Second Amendment. This also applies to the capacities of commonplace magazines for semi-automatic firearms, both handgun and rifle.

With Ginsberg really shaky, I'm prayin' for Trump to get another Justice on the Supreme Court. Heard on the radio the other day that Trump has had great success in getting his judges seated; something like 140 in federal courts across the land. Might have been even more; I don't remember exactly. Every Originalist Trump gets seated is just that much more body armor on the "person" of our Individual Liberty...
 
Funny you should mention, "Common Use, Common Type" The court also found Common Chamberings and Historical designs to be protected, especially if they were once in "Common Use" So Dads Old Bring Back Mauser 98 or Surplus 1903 is in fact protected. Same as all the lever actions and revolvers, even the 1911 and the AR are protected! Basically, the finding is that EVERY thing is covered!
 

Upcoming Events

Crossroads of the West Gun Show
Sandy, UT

New Resource Reviews

Back Top